Ideas of Constructivism in Philosophy of Education: From Ontology To Phenomenology

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 5

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/296776300

Ideas of constructivism in philosophy of education: From ontology to


phenomenology

Article · January 2014

CITATIONS READS

6 2,572

1 author:

Sergey Borisov
South Ural State University
33 PUBLICATIONS   11 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Theory and practice of philosophical counseling: comparative approach View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sergey Borisov on 18 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Life Science Journal 2014;11(11) http://www.lifesciencesite.com

Ideas of constructivism in philosophy of education: from ontology to phenomenology

Sergey Valentinovich Borisov

Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University, Lenin Avenue, 69, Chelyabinsk, 454080, Russia

Abstract. On the basis of education we understand, we interpret the world, but we don’t feel education, itself getting
used to follow the standards and rules which have no sufficient proof. Education is not that the person knows, but
something that really influences his behavior. Education is a dynamic system of interaction between designs of
consciousness and environment. Education “designs” the person.
[Borisov S.V. Ideas of constructivism in philosophy of education: from ontology to phenomenology. Life Sci J
2014;11(11):399-402] (ISSN:1097-8135). http://www.lifesciencesite.com. 67

Keywords: philosophy of education, constructivism, consciousness, knowledge

Introduction corresponds to those principles about which we spoke


What is the main distinctive feature of above.
constructivist philosophizing? Possibly, What is the subject of philosophy of
constructivism considers reality as an open dynamic education? The philosophy of education considers
system. Therefore, it is the subject, not only the intellectual and moral development of the person in
objects. Certainly, any system can be object of culture and as how it can be promoted by “education
research, not from a position of third-party system”. At discussion of problems about education
supervision, but from a position of forming relations it is necessary to address to fundamental
with system in the course of interaction. The person philosophical questions. We completely share S.I.
is an activity source; in this case knowledge is a Hessen’s position which in the “Fundamentals of
process of creation reality projects, experience pedagogic”, defines education as culture of the
projects of a person, instead of reflection of the individual, and considers that fight of various
“external” world. The knowledge represents process pedagogical theories between itself is only reflection
of the relations of designs of consciousness with the of deeper philosophical contradictions which are their
world. cornerstone [2].
The consciousness has an ontological status There is such a statement: education is what
in constructivism which is both “first”, and the “last” remains when almost everything studied before is
basis. However, cognitive designs inherent in forgotten. It we consider education as system of
consciousness can be found and investigated only models of the world with its subsystems –
indirectly. Interaction of the subject and object is a knowledge, abilities, skills – the whole structure, is
system of those cognitive designs. The most known more important, than separate elements, even the
among them are: aprioristic forms of consciousness loss, of a large number of knowledge won’t bring
(I. Kant), archetypes collective unconscious (K.G. damage to education. In the early childhood
Jung), long term informative habits (D. Hume), education is usually driven by personal interest of a
scientific paradigms (T. Kuhn), cultural installations person. Spontaneity always is present in education as
– “prejudices” (M. Heidegger, H.-G. Gadamer), it is interaction of open dynamic systems: person,
language structures (F. de Saussure), cultural signs, group, society. If in natural development of a person
symbols, texts (structuralisms), etc. a large role plays a case, within “education system”
Cognitive designs provide adaptation and an the organization the order plays a large role too, but
organism survival. Therefore from the constructivist mankind still hasn’t learn to keep balance between
point of view knowledge have to be viable. Cognitive these aspects of education. To construct educational
designs give chance of future predictions. They system which will satisfy all is probably impossible.
provide stable life experience of the person, and But it is possible to assume that any
therefore, a stable picture of the world. interaction of the person with the world is training,
There are many theories which can be but has impact, only that is necessary for person. We
considered as constructivism. It is difficult to classify see it on the example of assimilation by the person of
these theories because they unite many scientific the native language. The sense of any language
disciplines. In our opinion, existing classifications are expression is understood in a culture context,
not satisfactory: either they are deprived of the language implicitly expresses such understanding of
uniform basis or they are not full [1]. However in all the world. Development of the native language
variety of constructivist theories of each of them happens in unconsciousness. The structure of the

http://www.lifesciencesite.com 399 [email protected]


Life Science Journal 2014;11(11) http://www.lifesciencesite.com

native language defines a way of perception of the M. Polanyi notes that though we clearly
world and cognitive features. Actually, it is a understand the volume and specifics of our
question of aprioristic forms of consciousness as knowledge, we hardly imagine it in details.
basic designs on which all further cognitive Understanding of these details happens in case we
experience of the person is constructed. seize all subject domains which they enter as part.
So, designing of reality happens by the help This feeling by the nature is similar to not articulated
of aprioristic forms of sensual experience and mind knowledge, helping to find a way in a difficult
(I. Kant). The person learns the world, proceeding situation; however it has wider sphere of application
from aprioristic structures of consciousness. thanks to participation in it linguistic indexes. Their
Aprioristic forms of consciousness can be considered ability to adapt allows us to keep constantly in the
in quality of “hereditary working hypotheses” (G. field of vision the huge volume of skilled data and to
Vollmer) [3] which passed evolutionary natural keep confidence that these uncountable data if it is
selection (adaptation). Adaptive congenital structures required, can be at our disposal [8]. Thus, education
correspond to reality so as far as provide an organism is a latent knowledge.
survival. Adaptation is an ability to reveal regularities But why our knowledge is for us of such of
of the world and on the basis of it to predict the great importance in spite of the fact that their bases
future (E. von Glasersfeld) [4]. The live system remain obscure? Polanyi’s answer to this question is
possesses a certain set of operations (H. Maturana, F. similar to the Hume’s answer: because we believe
Varela) [5] therefore cognitive processes are already that rationality, congenital from them, is guarantee of
predetermined by feature of the organization and compliance of reality. We recognize the knowledge
system functioning. power because we see in them instructions
Congenital mechanisms (“the closed concerning reality, and it serves as a guarantee, of
programs”), are structures for organism adaptation. their use in the future. At the heart of this process our
They are necessary for perception and process personal conviction that knowledge is connected with
information necessary for a survival. They precede reality. Thus, we not simply establish for ourselves
experience and are prerequisites of knowledge of the standards, we thus believe in the ability to learn
world. For example, “archetypes” (K.G. Jung) are objective reality and to make on it our influence.
unconsciousness structures; “universal structures of Only thanks to our education (on its basis) we
consciousness” (K. Lévi-Strauss) define behavior of understand the world though education remains
the person. The person is so biologically arranged. hidden for us. We got used to follow norms or rules
Ability of the person to get and accumulate without sufficient basis.
information on the world (“the open program”), From the constructivist point of view
though it isn’t concluded in a genome, but is carried education plays a fundamental role in development of
out on the basis of congenital cognitive structures. the individual – provides his survival, adaptation. It is
Knowledge from past experience – “action schemes” cultural process, instead of biological. There is a
(J. Piaget) – designs new knowledge. Thanks to transformation “the person natural” into “the person
“cognitive balance” all contradictions with past cultural”. Education purpose: is expansion from the
experience are eliminated. It promotes training. sphere of consciousness to level of “Absolute
Training happens to the help of two processes – thought”. This thought exists irrespective of
assimilations and accommodations. Assimilation is environment, but environment stimulates its activity.
an accession of new objects or new situations to The thought has its own laws, conducts its own life.
cognitive schemes. Accommodation is an adaptation Brain is the thought’s tool, his servant, but not the
of cognitive schemes to new conditions. owner. The thought can be explained by means of the
Accommodation finishes process of “cognitive analysis of its creations. The teacher tries to induce
balance” [6]. his students’ thought by means of his own example.
The belief in the facts on which any Its task: “to set in motion thought train”. The same
knowledge of the world is based, is based on any we can say about a person responsibility which isn’t
object from memory or perception, and on its created in the person, but is waken in him. For the
habitual connection with any other object. Such person the moral is a choice which provides for
belief with need arises when mind is put in similar freedom. Therefore education is a formation of
conditions. All this is “natural instincts” which can’t freedom, understanding by the individual of the
be result of process of reasoning. L. Wittgenstein freedom and opportunity to make the choice, a
wrote: “What kind of grounds have I for trusting text- responsible act. All the other in education are means
books of experimental physics? I have no grounds for for achievement of this main goal. It is impossible to
not trusting them.” [7] foreknow what becomes this or that person. It can’t
be created artificially, the help is only possible. Steps

http://www.lifesciencesite.com 400 [email protected]


Life Science Journal 2014;11(11) http://www.lifesciencesite.com

of education are described by G. Hegel in communicative interaction. As the person always is


“Philosophy of spirit” as ways of activity of spirit [9]. in unity with cultural environment, even “the
At the level of the basic designs which are materialized” social institutes also are products of its
cornerstone of education it is impossible to divide creative activity; however it, as a rule, isn’t realized
that is congenital that is acquired: congenital by it. Social institutes have direct impact on outlook
programs will organize behavior only schematically, of the person through schemes of values, behavior,
they need the subsequent completion. Completion of the roles acquired in the course of socialization [11].
hereditary programs (according to K. Lorenz – “an The person interprets cultural symbols by means of
imprinting”) occurs when environment stimulates “a network of preferences” (P. Ricoeur). These are
adequate behavior. “The imprinting” concretizes and the certain cognitive designs, acquired during
specifies received information. If environment education.
doesn’t show necessary irritants, congenital programs Intersubjectivity is intelligence. This
die away. Sometimes the organism creates designs intelligence is explained by immersion of the person
which are exaggeration of properties of normal in a context of “language games” (L. Wittgenstein).
objects because it can improve the adaptation to The purpose of language game is elimination of
unforeseen circumstances. Positive or negative “traps” of a natural language by a way of continuous
emotions give information on success or failure of “translation” of unclear sentences in clear ones,
activity. Striving for positive emotions and trying to helping to describe object exactly or the phenomenon
avoid negative emotions, the organism improves the according to “a network of preferences”.
cognitive designs [10]. Thus in ontological Intersubjectivity functions only in system of language
understanding education is not that the person knows games and human activity.
and remembers, but that really influences his If the culture exists in language games, the
behavior. concepts sending to concreteness are characterized by
Transition from “natural suggestion” (E. “utopian designation” (R. Barthes). They have no
Husserl) to knowledge of essence of phenomena (“a ontological definiteness, natural communication
pure consciousness stream”) which are true objects of between “designatum” and “denotatum” because
knowledge as they are exempted from all empirical designation in language games doesn’t correspond
and psychological, is carried out at level of “the directly to reality; it is connected with it only
transcendental person”. What does this design indirectly through a sign or a symbol [12].
represent? There is only a transcendental As all manifestations of reality from the
consciousness and the world of phenomena. Thanks point of view of constructivism can be considered as
to consciousness intension the subject and object cultural texts, it is impossible to understand these
mutually supplement each other. Process of designing texts, without having destroyed former stereotypes (J.
of reality is carried out by means of conceptual Derrida). The sense of the text exists only at the time
intuition and aprioristic synthesis. Thus the of its reading, it isn’t given us once and for all, and it
consciousness not only designs reality, but also has no unambiguous interpretation. The reality of the
“completes” itself. It helps to create steady idea of cultural text is “rhizome” (G. Deleuze, P.-F.
reality. Such designing is carried out by means of a Guattari). It is open dynamic system without the
human body (M. Merleau-Ponty) which defines the center which develops diversely according to
horizon of existential continuum and experience. different interpretations of sense [13].
Means of designing of the content of Education “designs” the person. The person
individual consciousness and system of ideas of is in the power of usual language and trifles, he
reality are “universal language structures” (F. de merges with crowd. The crowd washes away identity,
Saussure). The reality, thus, is a set of sign systems imposes standards and values. To understand
and texts. By means of the logical analysis by themselves and to find freedom, the person has to
refining of words and sentences which make find the center, the reference point to which its forces
knowledge of reality, we can reach knowledge of the will be directed. Freedom understanding in identity
world. This is an essence of “logical atomism” (B. occurs by means of existence “on the verge”. It gives
Russell). Thus the person “is dissolved” in a language a choice and belief in forces. Person in search of truth
order (J. Lacan). The language network entangles the listen to itself. The understanding the person of
world and reduces reality to language therefore the unique “existentia” becomes the truth.
person turns into a symbol. The teacher has to create for pupils a
The intersubjectivity is only this way situation of a choice. The special attention should be
possible. The intersubjectivity is caused by processes paid to communication improvement. Each person is
of “habitualization”, “reification”, “legitimation” (P. the participant of general process of training, and the
Berger, T. Luckmann) and is a product of freedom of expression is necessary to every person. It

http://www.lifesciencesite.com 401 [email protected]


Life Science Journal 2014;11(11) http://www.lifesciencesite.com

can be compared with orchestra rehearsal. The 2. Hessen, S.I., 1995. Fundamentals of pedagogic.
discipline is supported because of self-discipline. Introduction in applied philosophy. Moscow:
This voluntary consent serves a common goal – School Press, pp: 20.
harmony. However, it is possible to reach obedience 3. Vollmer, G., 1975. Evolutionäre
by an “army” way. Here the discipline is supported Erkenntnistheorie: angeborene
only by fear of punishment. The good soldier is Erkenntnisstrukturen im Kontext von Biologie,
disciplined not for the sake of army as whole. It has Psychologie, Linguistik, Philosophie u.
no interest to this whole. He is dependent, deprived Wissenschaftstheorie. Hirzel.
of identity. There is a desire to hope that during 4. Glasersfeld, E., 1997. Radikaler
education there will be “a spirit of an orchestra”, Konstruktivismus: Ideen, Ergebnisse, Probleme.
instead of “spirit of army”. Suhrkamp Verlag GmbH.
All history of pedagogic is noted by fight of 5. Maturana, H. and F. Varela, 1980. Autopoiesis
two ideas: the first, that education is the development and Cognition: The Realization of the Living
going from within that it is based on natural abilities Ratings. D. Reidel Publishing Company, pp: 63-
and ideas, and the second, that education – the 134.
formation going from the outside and representing 6. Piaget, J., 1955. The Construction of Reality in
process of transformation of natural bents in cultural the Child. (The last chapter). Date Views
skills. In our opinion, this fight of ideas has no 08.02.2014 www.marxists.org/reference/
sufficient philosophical basis. Dispute is based on subject/philosophy/works/fr/piaget2.htm.
“misunderstanding”. The thesis and the antithesis 7. Wittgenstein, L., 1969-1975. On Certainty
don’t deny each other, and serve as conditions for (Uber Gewissheit). § 600. Basil Blackwell. Date
synthesis which and there is an education process. It Views 08.02.2014 www.ru.scribd.com/doc/
carries out dialectic removal of contrasts. It is 31446138/Ludwig-Wittgenstein-On-Certainty.
senseless to argue that it is more important for an 8. Hammond, P., 2004. Personal Knowledge and
organism – the right or left foot. Everything is Human Creativity. Tradition & Discovery: The
interdependent, represents uniform dynamic system Polanyi Society Periodical, 2: 24-34.
of interaction of basic designs of consciousness with 9. Hegel, G.W.F., 1977. Philosophy of spirit.
environment, “a call and the answer”. This idea of Encyclopedia of philosophical sciences: in 3
constructivism is essence of philosophy of education. volumes. V. 3. Moscow: Thought, pp: 268-306.
Article is prepared within a task # 2014/396 10. Cardoso, S.H. and R. Sabbatini, 2001. Learning
of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Who is Your Mother: The Behavior of
Russian Federation for performance of the state Imprinting. Brain & Mind: Electronic magazine
works in the sphere of scientific activity. on Neuroscience, 11. Date Views 09.02.2014
www.cerebromente.org.br/n14/experimento/lore
Corresponding Author: nz/index-lorenz.html.
Dr. Borisov Sergey Valentinovich 11. Berger, P. and T. Luckmann, 1996. The Social
Chelyabinsk State Pedagogical University Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the
Lenin Avenue, 69, Chelyabinsk, 454080, Russia Sociology of Knowledge. Moscow: Medium,
Chapter 2.
References 12. Reid, M., 2001. S/Z Revisited. Yale Journal of
1. Kasavin, I.T., A.Yu. Antonovsky and G.I. Criticism: Interpretation in the Humanities,
Ruzavin, 2009. Constructivism. Encyclopedia of 14(2): 447-452.
an epistemology and science philosophy. 13. Deleuze, G. and C. Parnet, 1987. Dialogues II.
Мoscow: “Canon +” ROOI “Rehabilitation”, Continuum, pp: 39.
pp: 373-380.

7/2/2014

http://www.lifesciencesite.com 402 [email protected]

View publication stats

You might also like